SIKANDARMIYA ABDULMIYA MALEK vs LATE RAHIMMIYA BHULAMIYA MALEK HEIRS Advocate - P B BHATT — 47/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 009,. Disposed: Contested--FINAL DECREE on 30th March 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKH090004882016
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
47/2016
Filing Date
22-06-2016
Registration No
47/2016
Registration Date
22-06-2016
Court
TALUKA COURT, MAHUDHA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--FINAL DECREE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SIKANDARMIYA ABDULMIYA MALEK
Adv. N B CHAUHAN
Respondent(s)
LATE RAHIMMIYA BHULAMIYA MALEK HEIRS Advocate - P B BHATT
LATE KARIMMIYA BHULAMIYA MALEK HEIRS(Legal Heir)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 13-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 09-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 23-02-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court partially allowed the plaintiff's partition suit, holding that ancestral agricultural lands are jointly owned by the plaintiff and defendants as coparceners with specific share allocations (plaintiff and one defendant group: ¼ each; another defendant group: ¼; remaining defendant: ½). The District Collector of Kheda was directed to physically partition the lands and deliver separate possession according to these shares, with partition expenses borne by the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court partially allowed the plaintiff's partition suit, holding that ancestral agricultural lands are jointly owned by the plaintiff and defendants as coparceners with specific share allocations (plaintiff and one defendant group: ¼ each; another defendant group: ¼; remaining defendant: ½). The District Collector of Kheda was directed to physically partition the lands and deliver separate possession according to these shares, with partition expenses borne by the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts